Flash or macro?

[Steve Eisenberg]

Just to give some perspective, a honey bee is about half as long as this guy's wing.

[HiFiGuy1]

I woudl go with the 100mm f/2.8 macro first. [img]/emoticons/emotion-15.gif[/img]



<p style="CLEAR: both"]

Don Burkett,


WOW! That's beautiful. I want my shots to have this contrast and drama. How did you get the background so black? Is it Photoshopped, or did you hang black fabric behind the flower and get the smoothness with DOF. Also, it looks like you used a flash. Is that correct?

[HiFiGuy1]

help you. You get less more bakground blur with a given framing, true, but only because you have less dof. The only difference with a larger sensor is that the lens will seem shorter (which is the opposite of what you want... if anything, moving away and cropping might have helped).
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

This is more, correct? I inferred that from the following part about less DOF. That is what I was thinking, too. I agree, I want the lens to seem longer, so I guess I am lucky for now to have the APS-C. I am nowl thinking that, if I had a macro lens, I could compose the shot the same, use a smaller aperture to create just slightly more DOF on the subject itself, but the exaggerateddistance compression of the macro would allow me to get the blurring in the background I want. Does that seem reasonable? The more I think about it, the more I see that I really need the EF 180mm Lmacro[], but that is definitely not happening, at least not today!

[Jon Ruyle]

I meant more, of course. Sorry...


I'm not sure you need the 180mm... the 100mm macro is great. And if you want to do macros beyond 1x, the 100mm might even work better, since extension tubes should have a greater effect on the shorter focal length. And for more moderate closeups (butterflies, flowers, etc) I find that the 70-200 IS with extension tubes works well (I like IS for this). Of course if I could afford the 180mm, I might feel differently about it


I'm not sure what you mean by exaggerated distance compression of the macro. If you compose the shot the same, you don't get any different distance compression than you do with any other 100mm lens.

[HiFiGuy1]

Okay, so the magnification advantage aspect of being a macro doesn't affect the distance compression? I wasn't sure, since the magnification was higher with the macro lens. I didn't know how that affected things other than the ability to get physically closer to a subject. I guess I am more confused than ever now why I even want a macro at all. I thought I got it, but as this unfolds I am understanding that apparently, macro or not, a 100mm lens will pull in the same shot at 1.5 ft (sensor to subject)that a 200mm lens can do from 3 ft. So can anyone help me clearly understand why I want a macro at all? Otherwise, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS is starting to look more attractive, even though that means I'll have to save for a while.

[Jon Ruyle]

The macro lets you focus closer, thus gaining greater magnification. With the 100mm macro at minimum focusing distance (about 200mm), your field is the size of your image sensor. Typical lenses don't allow you to get anywhere near that much magnification. The 70-200 f/2.8 IS can't focus closer than about 1400mm.


If you don't want to focus closer than typical lenses do, there is no reason at all to get the macro. The idea is to get pictures of tiny things, not to get more background blur.


It is true that when you magnify you get very diffuse background blur and narrow dof. But if you take a picture- framed the same- with two different 100mm lenses, one macro and one not, there is no difference.

[Don Burkett]

Don Burkett,


WOW! That's beautiful. I want my shots to have this contrast and drama. How did you get the background so black? Is it Photoshopped, or did you hang black fabric behind the flower and get the smoothness with DOF. Also, it looks like you used a flash. Is that correct?
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Thank you for the compliment and I do believe I had a black backdrop on this one. A friend of mine and I have access to a greenhouse that specializes in orchids. When they're not busy we will set up a backdrop but no special lighting. However, if you have a reasonably dark background (shadows) and a nice white centerpiece, as this does, to spot focus on, you can underexpose the background which often results in near black and curve adjustments can finish the job. You can also get it with a flash. I don't often use flash though as I haven't developed a good technique with it yet.

[ShutterbugJohan]

I faced the same question last year; currently I have both the 100 Macro and 580EX II. I've never regretted buying the the 100/2.8 Macro first. It is great for both macro and low light situations such as weddings. This photo was taken with the 100/2.8 using available light.


http://naturesbeststudents.blogspot.com/2009/02/need-for-speed.html

[EdN]

Here are some assorted bug and flower shots taken with the 100 F2.8 macro and 580EX flash last summer and fall.


The spider was shot at F/8, 1/250s, ISO 500, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_1709cr.jpg[/img]


F/8, 1/100s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_1984r.jpg[/img]


F/8, 1/200s, ISO 100, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2210r.jpg[/img]


F/8, 1/80s, ISO 200, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2245r.jpg[/img]


F/14, 1/125s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2357r.jpg[/img]


F/14, 1/100s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2369r.jpg[/img]


F/7.1, 1/160 s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2458r.jpg[/img]


F/7.1, 1/125s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_2895r.jpg[/img]


F/8, 1/160s, ISO 400, 5D


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Components.UserFiles/00.00.00.22.66/IMG_5F00_3495r.jpg[/img]

[Colin]

second pic, way dig it!